alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         December 7, 2023.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on November 20, 2023, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 111 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2024-68, CP2024-69.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2023-26829 Filed 12-6-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
<PAGE>


                                  EXHIBIT 32.2



                            HANOVER FOODS CORPORATION



                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 ( Section
1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code), each of the
undersigned officers of Hanover Foods Corporation (the "Company"), does hereby
certify with respect to the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K/A for the
period ended June 1, 2003 (the "Report") that:

         (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
              or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
              material respects, the financial condition and results of
              operations of the Company.







Date:  September 9, 2003

                                          /s/ Gary T. Knisely
                                          -----------------------
                                          Gary T. Knisely
                                          Chief Financial Officer


         The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of
Title 18 of the United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Report
or as a separate disclosure document.
January 29, 2004

24769

#### Doe, In re

Affirmed
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; Evaluating Neurocognitive Complications of Pediatric Type 1 Diabetes.                    

*Date:*                         March 12, 2024.                    

*Time:*                         10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, NIDDK, Democracy II, Suite 7000A, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Michele L. Barnard, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Review Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 7353, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-2542, (301) 594-8898,                         *barnardm@extra.niddk.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; 93.848, Digestive Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: November 29, 2023.

Miguelina Perez, 

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2023-26631 Filed 12-4-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
#### State v. Salis.

27451

04/23/2008

Affirmed in part/vacated in part
In The 

Court of Appeals 

Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07-13-00302-CR 

KRISTOPHER TONY GARCIA, APPELLANT 

 

V. 

 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE 

 

On Appeal from the 242nd District Court 

Hale County, Texas 

Trial Court No. B19066-1202, Honorable Edward Lee Self, Presiding 

 

March 25, 2014 

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

 

Before QUINN, C.J., and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ. 

Appellant, Kristopher Tony Garcia, entered a plea of guilty to the charge of 

unauthorized use of a motor vehicle,

1

a state jail felony, and was placed on deferred 

adjudication for a period of three years, pursuant to a plea bargain. Subsequently, the 

State filed a motion to adjudicate appellant. At the hearing on the motion to adjudicate, 

appellant entered pleas of true to the allegations made by the State. Thereafter, the 

trial court found the allegations to be true and after hearing the evidence on 

 

1 See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 31.07 (West 2011).
2

punishment, sentenced appellant to two years in a State Jail Facility. Appellant gave 

notice of appeal. We will affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Appellant’s attorney has filed an Anders brief and a motion to withdraw. Anders

v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed. 2d 498 (1967). In support of his 

motion to withdraw, counsel certifies that he has diligently reviewed the record, and in 

his opinion, the record reflects no reversible error upon which an appeal can be 

predicated. Id. at 744–45. In compliance with High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 813 (Tex.

Crim. App. 1978), counsel has candidly discussed why, under the controlling authorities, 

there is no error in the trial court’s judgment. Additionally, counsel has certified that he 

has provided appellant a copy of the Anders brief and motion to withdraw, and 

appropriately advised appellant of his right to file a pro se response in this matter. 

Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). The Court has also 

advised appellant of his right to file a pro se response. Appellant has not filed a 

response. By his Anders brief, counsel reviewed all grounds that could possibly support 

an appeal, but concludes the appeal is frivolous. We have reviewed these grounds and 

made an independent review of the entire record to determine whether there are any 

arguable grounds which might support an appeal. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 

109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988); Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824 (Tex. Crim.

App. 2005). We have found no such arguable grounds and agree with counsel that the 

appeal is frivolous.
3

Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is hereby granted, and the trial court’s 

judgment is affirmed.

2

Mackey K. Hancock

 Justice

Do not publish. 

 

2 Counsel shall, within five days after this opinion is handed down, send his client 

a copy of the opinion and judgment, along with notification of appellant=s right to file a 

pro se petition for discretionary review. See TEX. R. APP. P. 48.4.
Exhibit 10.10


 


Second AMENDMENT
TO Promissory note


 


THIS
SECOND Amendment (THE “SECOND AMENDMENT”) DATED July 27, 2018,
shall amend the Promissory note (THE “NOTE”) dated AS OF OCTOBER 27,
2015 AND AMENDED ON JULY 20, 2017 (THE “FIRST AMENDMENT”) AMONG NON-INVASIVE MONITORING SYSTEMS, INC. (THE “MAKER”)
AND frost gamma investments trust (THE “PAYEE”) AS NOTED BELOW. THE
NOTE, THE FIRST AMENDMENT, AND THE SECOND AMENDMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO AS THE AMENDED NOTE.


 


RECITALS


 


WHEREAS, Maker and
Payee (collectively, the “Parties”) are parties to the Note which became effective on October 27, 2015; and


 


WHEREAS, on July
20, 2017, the Parties amended the Note to extend the Maturity Date from July 31, 2017 until July 31, 2018; and


 


WHEREAS, the Parties
desire to amend the Note to extend the Maturity Date from July 31, 2018 until July 31, 2020.


 


NOW THEREFORE, in
consideration of the mutual covenants and promises contained in the Note and this Second Amendment and other good and valuable
consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows:


 


AMENDMENT


 


1. Section
1 of the Note is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as follows:


 


The principal amount of the loan evidenced
hereby, together with any accrued and unpaid interest, and any and all unpaid costs, fees and expenses accrued, shall be due and
payable on July 31, 2020 (the “Maturity Date”).


 


2. Governing Law.
This Second Amendment shall be governed by the laws of the State of Florida without regard to its conflict of laws rules or principles.


 


3. Amendments. Except
as expressly amended hereby, the Note shall remain unmodified and in full force and effect.


 


4. Entire Agreement.
This Second Amendment and the Note constitute the entire agreement of the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and
supersede all prior understandings and writings between the Parties relating thereto.


 






    	 



    	 



    

 





5. Interpretation.
Any capitalized terms used in this Second Amendment but not otherwise defined shall have the meaning provided in the Note.


 


6. Counterparts.
This Second Amendment may be executed manually, electronically in Adobe® PDF file format, or by facsimile by the Parties, in
any number of counterparts, each of which shall be considered one and the same amendment and shall become effective when a counterpart
hereof shall have been signed by each of the Parties and delivered to the other Party.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
Borrower has duly executed this Second Amendment to the Note and Security Note as of the 27th day of July, 2018.


 


	 	 	 	NON-INVASIVE MONITORING SYSTEMS, INC. 
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	
        By:

        
	/s/ James J. Martin
	 	 	 	
        Name:

        
	James J. Martin
	 	 	 	Title:	Chief Financial Officer
	 	 	 	 	 
	Agreed and Accepted:	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	FROST GAMMA INVESTMENTS TRUST	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	
        By:

        
	/s/ Phillip Frost, M.D.	 	 	 
	Name:	Phillip Frost, M.D.	 	 	 
	Title:	Trustee
#### Gardner *et al. v.*Jones *et al.*

Appeal and Error 4 O. J. pp. 575, n. 8Q; 6Q8, n. 42. New.

Gilbert, J.

On tlie call of the case for argument in this court, the defendant in error submitted a motion to dismiss the writ of error on the ground that the issue was moot, and in connection with the motion submitted affidavits tending to show that when the injunction was re: fused the previously granted restraining order was set aside, that no supersedeas was granted, and that thereafter the .trial of the election contest before the ordinary proceeded to a conclusion and the judgment of the ordinary had been rendered, and that, this being the sole object of the application for injunction, the question is now moot. The plaintiffs in error filed an answer to the motion, in which the facts contained in the motion were not denied, but they insisted that the ordinary had no jurisdiction to try said contest; that a certificate from the ordinary as such, or from the court of ordinary, proves nothing as to the result of any contest tried before O.' O. Shirley, the individual, he being the umpire to hear and determine such contest simply because he happened to be the man designated by law, and that therefore this court was without “authentic information” on the question of whether the ordinary had heard and decided the election contest. *Held:*That answer of the plaintiff in error is not a direct denial that the ordinary has heard and concluded tlie election contest, and therefore raises no issue of fact. *287The plaintiffs in error having, in their answer, failed to raise an issue of fact, the facts stated in the motion to dismiss will be accepted as true. The case is therefore dismissed on the ground that the sole question to be determined is moot.

No. 4960.

November 14, 1925.

Petition for injunction. Before Judge Blair. Milton superior court. June 9, 1925.

*George F. Gober*and *G. B. Walker,*for plaintiffs.

*J. P. Brooke,*for defendants.

*Writ of error dismissed.*

*All the Justices eoneur.*
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

PAMELA BARRIER, As Guardian of the Person and Property of CHAD A.

BARRIER , Appellant,

v.

JFK MEDICAL CENTER LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, d/b/a JFK MEDICAL CENTER, PALM BEACH EMERGENCY MEDICAL ASSOCIATES, P.L., A Limited Liability Corporation, JASON SEVALD, M.D., ARMOR CORRECTIONAL HEALTH SERVICES, INC., A Florida Corporation, TANYA BEAUMONT, L.P.N., SHARA DAVIS, L.P.N., PATRICIA SALMON, L.P.N., GARRY J. BEAUZILE, M.D., and PIERRE DORSAINVIL, M.D.
, Appellee s

.

No. 4D 14

- 560

[ November 12, 2015 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; Jack S. Cox , Judge; L.T. Case No.

502012CA022822XXXXMB

.

Howard S. Gro ssman of Grossman Attorneys At Law, Boca Raton, and Joel S. Perwin of Joel S. Perwin, P.A., Miami, for appellant.

Jedidiah Vander Klok, Mark Hicks and Dinah Stein of Hicks, Porter, Ebenfeld & Stein, P.A., Miami, for appellee JFK Medical Center Limited

Par tnership, d/b/a JFK Medical Center.

Elizabeth K. Russo of Russo Appellate Firm, P.A., Miami, and Jami L. Gursky of Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A., Fort Lauderdale for appellees Armor Correctional Health Services, Inc., Tanya Beaumont, L.P.N., Shara Davis, L. P.N., Patricia Salmon, L.P.N., Garry J. Beauzile, M.D., and Pierre Dorsainvil, M.D.

P ER C URIAM

.

In light of our reversal of the summary judgment in Barrier v. JFK Medical Center Ltd. Partnership

, 169 So. 3d 185 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (case no. 4D 13

- 3041), we reverse the January 27, 2014 final judgment2

awarding costs against plaintiff, Pamela Barrier, as guardian of the person and property of Chad A. Barrier, and remand for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded.

C IKLIN
, C.J., G ERBER and L EVI NE
, JJ., concur

.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
#### New Amsterdam Casualty Company, Plaintiff, *v.*Philip Miller et al., Individually and as Copartners Doing Business under the Name of Main Street Service Center, et al., Defendants.

Supreme Court, Special and Trial Term, New York County,

May 26, 1959.

*Stanley D. Hicks*and *Joseph F. Lenihan*for plaintiff.

*Kreisel S Powell (Arthur Zale*of counsel), for Philip Miller and another, defendants.

*Hartsell, Harrington <& Jacobs (George Harrington*of counsel), for Harold Schmidt, defendant.

Henry Clay Greenberg, J.

The complaint sets forth an action for declaratory judgment based upon plaintiff’s disclaimer of liability grounded in the alleged noncompliance by certain defendants — the insured — with condition 9 of the insurance policy in suit requiring written notice of accident.

The credible proof is that the accident occurred on June 15, 1956 and that no written notice thereof was given to the plaintiff insurance company until October 26, 1956. The alleged oral *453notice to the company’s agent is disputed by the representative of the company and his testimony is accepted by the court. In the court’s opinion, the foregoing circumstances completely fail to constitute compliance with the clear, specific requirements of the policy. (See *Bazar*v. *Great Amer. Ind. Co.,*306 N. Y. 481.) Defendants cite *Public Serv. Mut. Ins. Co.*v. *Hudson Properties*(15 Misc 2d 963); there the issue related to the applicability of an exclusion clause to the specific facts and, moreover, whether the unusual circumstances warranted an estoppel of the insurer’s disclaimer of liability. In *Barrett*v. *Century Ind. Co.*(115 N. Y. S. 2d 729), which the defendants urge is substantially on all fours with the issue at bar, the court determined that allegations of the insured affecting notice must be accepted as true on motions to dismiss and for judgment on pleading. The additional cases cited by the defendants are similarly inapplicable to or distinguishable from the present issues.

Judgment is directed in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant as prayed for in the complaint. Findings of fact and conclusions of law were waived. This constitutes the decision of the court pursuant to section 440 of the Civil Practice Act.

Settle judgment.
27453

#### Western Financial Bank, F.S.B. v. Raras

Affirmed in Part, Vacated in Part, and Remanded
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                          OF CORPORATE GENERAL PARTNER

            PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The  undersigned,  Robert A. Bourne,  the  President and Treasurer of CNL Realty
Corporation,  the  corporate  general  partner of CNL Income Fund XII, Ltd. (the
"Partnership"),  has executed this  certification  in connection with the filing
with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  of the  Partnership's  Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the period  ending  June 30,  2003 (the  "Report").  The
undersigned hereby certifies that:

(1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) the  information  contained in the Report fairly  presents,  in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.

Date:  August 12, 2003
                                             /s/ Robert A. Bourne
                                             --------------------------------
                                             Name:  Robert A. Bourne
                                             Title: President and Treasurer


                                             A signed  original of this  written
                                             statement  required  by Section 906
                                             has  been  provided  to CNL  Income
                                             Fund XII, Ltd. and will be retained
                                             by CNL Income  Fund XII,  Ltd.  and
                                             furnished  to  the  Securities  and
                                             Exchange  Commission  or its  staff
                                             upon request.
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-91,542-01

EX PARTE CHRISTOPHER STEVENSON, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 17-04-16008A IN THE 506 DISTRICT COURT TH

FROM WALLER COUNTY

Per curiam. YEARY, J., concurred.

O P I N I O N

Applicant was convicted of burglary of a building and sentenced to two years’ imprisonment.

Applicant filed this application for a writ of habeas corpus in the county of conviction, and the district

clerk forwarded it to this Court. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07.

Applicant contends, among other things, that he is actually innocent. Based on the record,

the trial court has determined that Applicant has established by clear and convincing evidence that

he is actually innocent.

We agree. Relief is granted. Ex parte Elizondo, 947 S.W.2d 202 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996);

Ex parte Tuley, 109 S.W.3d 388 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002). The judgment in cause number 17-04-

16008 in the 506 District Court of Waller County is set aside, and Applicant is remanded to the

th
2

custody of the Sheriff of Waller County to answer the charges as set out in the indictment. The trial

court shall issue any necessary bench warrant within ten days from the date of this Court’s mandate.

Copies ofthis opinion shallbe sent to the Texas Department ofCriminalJustice–Correctional

Institutions Division and the Board of Pardons and Paroles.

Delivered: February 10, 2021

Do not publish